JSON example too verbose

[joergklausen]

@tomkralidis : Re https://github.com/wmo-im/wmdr2-devt/blob/main/resources/oarec-compat/0-20008-0-THE.json

It is pretty heavy on future users to have to create and submit something like

        "program": {
            "id": "GALION",
            "title": "GALION",
            "description": "GAW Aerosol Lidar Observation Network",
            "url": "http://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/ProgramAffiliation/GALION"
        },

when the only relevant piece of information is the url. This is an actionable link, and the id, title, description can be obtained there. They are called notation, label, description.

I propose to make this lighter, i.e.,

    "programAffiliation": [
      {
        "href": "http://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/ProgramAffiliation/GAWregional"
      }

We can decide on the names "program" vs "programAffiliation", and "url" vs "href" (no strong feelings). An application using these codes and potentially generating such json will cache the codelists and can potentially generate the additional attributes id, title, description.

Objections?

[tomkralidis]

@joergklausen we are heavily re-using OGC API - Records "Concepts", and note that the id property is the only required element. Having said this, we could provide something like:

        "program": {
            "id": "http://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/ProgramAffiliation/GALION"
        },

However, that deviates from the Concept approach (i.e. OGC, and WCMP2 for that matter), so the below can be realized:

        "program": {
            "id": "GALION",
            "url": "http://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/ProgramAffiliation/GALION"
        },

I don't see this as a high barrier for creation while giving a known, interoperable construct to users who want to add the additional fields.